Re: [Sursound] Calculating speaker placement (Marc Lavall?e)

Are you asking how to figure out the angles or how to arrange to hold the speakers in position? One pattern you could use with 30 instead of 32 speakers would be to put speakers at the midpoints of the edges of a regular dodehedron. (there are 30 edges). This is a quite regular pattern though t

Re: [Sursound] Suggestions spherical loudspeaker installation observatory

have an obvious existence. Robert On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Michael Chapman wrote: Robert Greene wrote : ... If you need more points, then there is no "canonical" choice(and no one is going to "discover" any more Platonic solids--there aren't any more!). ... Sorr

Re: [Sursound] Suggestions spherical loudspeaker installation observatory

Decades ago, I was working on a project to find the best way to equidistribute a large number of points on a sphere. We were looking for "random unit vectors". (This had to do with choosing "random" orientations for a pot containing a seed to see if the seed would sprout and grow without benefi

Re: [Sursound] aes journal article

As you say, not surprising. As someone who came originally from a noncommercial field of research(pure mathematics), I have long noticed that a good deal of "research" in audio comes from people either re-discovering or simply seizing ideas of other people, often long established, and re-packaging

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

real" sounding recordings which I know must have had timbral modifications but without very close and careful listening they have not been at all obvious - and I'm sure everyone else who's done any recording will have observed the same. Dave On 5 July 2013 17:20, Robert Greene wr

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

ry close and careful listening they have not been at all obvious - and I'm sure everyone else who's done any recording will have observed the same. Dave On 5 July 2013 17:20, Robert Greene wrote: Hugely long. But one point cries out for comment: It is simply nonsense to say that it

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

This seems sensible to me. Also, it is part of my basic hope, that one could come to understand exactly what one should do to make (a) below as accurate as possible. However, the description of (a) as sterile is something I would take issue with. I like the sound of real music. It does not sound

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

.com/. Please excuse the excess quoting deleting text is a job. Thanks! On Jul 5, 2013, at 1:04 PM, Robert Greene wrote: I should add that this is not "academic" for me. From (nonscientific) personal experience, I have formed the impression that spaced mike techniques color inst

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

t even exists , once one starts to look for it and look at it hard. Even the localisation literture is not all that convincing in detail as far as microphone technique is concerned, though there is a good bit of it. And a lot of it is contradicted by other parts of it.) Robert On Fri, 5 Jul 2013,

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

ience is about shared information. I know a proof of the Riemann hypothesis--but I am not telling. Everyone would laugh , if they even noticed. Information kept private is not really scientific information at all. Robert On Fri, 5 Jul 2013, Robert Greene wrote: If they are out there, please te

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

people can actually obtain? Localization--lots of literature and Boyk's recording Timbre--sources please? Robert On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, J?rn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 07/03/2013 06:31 AM, Robert Greene wrote: I apologize if people took offense. fwiw, i did not take offense at your clear prefe

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

WHat a lot of ado. I am not talking about understanding people. I am just asking : If you use mike technique x to record a pink noise source in position y , what does the result sound like on playback? This is a simple question. It is obviously relevant to what recording sound like in terms of so

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

/2013 05:31, Robert Greene wrote: If people want to treat recording as a pure art form where one simply judges the results on aesthetic grounds. it would be hard to say that was wrong. But it surely takes recording out of the realm of science. I am not sure that recording is a science per se

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

onstrated fact that it is for example the signal that gives the best identification of which loudspeaker is which when comparing blind two similar but different speaker. Robert On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, David Pickett wrote: At 06:31 3/7/2013, Robert Greene wrote: Variations from reality ought sure

Re: [Sursound] A higher standard of standardness

I apologize if people took offense. But the issue is serious. It is surely acceptable if people want to make recordings that do not sound like what was really there. This does not interest me personally all that much, but to each his own artistically. But surely no one would argue that this freed

Re: [Sursound] Giving Precedence to Ambisonics

This whole discussion is to my mind a living illustration of why no progress to speak of ever occurs in audio. Nothing is made precise, no one does any experiments on what happens to sound like what was there, everyone just talks about what sounds nice to them or what sounds like what they think

Re: [Sursound] Of stereo miking, Fourier analysis, and Ambisonics

This is for sure! The legendary Mercuries(three spaced omnis and nothing else) and their ilk are completely unconvincing to anyone who listens to them impartially-- there is no there there. But the whole nation of the USA has ignored this obvious fact for ..well pretty much forever. Once on th

Re: [Sursound] Of stereo miking, Fourier analysis, and Ambisonics

I do not understand the last bit of this message below at all. There is no such thing as a signal that is limited in bandwidth and in time--not if limited means actually 0 outside a finite interval in both cases. This is a basic result of Fourier analysis. This kind of signal does not exist, not

Re: [Sursound] Another query..

The real reason(aside from industry politics) is that there has never been easy access to material to play. NO demo discs appeared for a long time. Even now there is hardly anything. How can one sell an audio concept when people cannot hear it? It has been and still is --even in a time when mult

Re: [Sursound] Naive question on MS and Ambisonics

Didn't Lauridsen propose and experiment with stereo playback done this way--with a mono signal in the center and a diffference signal produced by a edgeon mounted dipole? Robert On Wed, 22 May 2013, J?rn Nettingsmeier wrote: Hi Ray, On 05/22/2013 01:24 AM, revery wrote: Hello j?rn, Thinking

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

Sorry! I read the wrong volume! RFH is actually 21,960. This gives critical distance ~ 7 meters. (not that this changes my basic point but just for the record) Robert On Wed, 22 May 2013, Robert Greene wrote: No. But the fact that a hall sounds anechoic or nearly so does not mean it is! To

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

presumably the Wharf. ones as well) Robert On Tue, 21 May 2013, David Pickett wrote: At 12:16 21-05-13, Robert Greene wrote: Even "dead" concert halls in the relative sense have a lot of reverberation. A really dead hall still has a 1 second reverberation time say and most of

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

Even "dead" concert halls in the relative sense have a lot of reverberation. A really dead hall still has a 1 second reverberation time say and most of what you hear in the audience is still reverberant sound. Robert On Mon, 20 May 2013, David Pickett wrote: At 00:50 18-05-13, Rob

Re: [Sursound] Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

The more things change This was the idea of the original Bell Telephone(as they were then) Labs "stereo" experiment! And of course the basic idea goes back to the 17th century (Christian Huygens). Robert On Sun, 19 May 2013, Justin Bennett wrote: On May 18, 2013, at 6:00 PM, sursoun

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

I think I did not make myself clear. Of course in those live versus canned experiments(also with AR) reverberation tended to make things sound pretty much the same to smooth out errors and so on. But in fact, if one records musical instrument with a mike and plays it back with a speaker has no h

Re: [Sursound] Recreating a 3d soundfield with lots of mics.....

The reality may work in the context of locating things. But the slogan description is scary because it is the road already followed by the recording industry into disaster. Trying to capture what is produced by a musical instrument rather than what is heard from a natural listening position

Re: [Sursound] impulse responses and distance

Actually air soaking up highs is not a very significant effect on direct arrivals except at large distances. The fact--and it is a fact--that the sound in a concert hall is so low in high frequency content compared to close up sound arises primarily from the "also" part in the message below. Quan

Re: [Sursound] [ot] analog vs. digital

This is of course true, what David says. Audio people are as they are-- they tend to think a lot more about audio than they listen to actual music-- but musicians(eg David) know that the highest frequencies have essentially sod all (since this is UK based list intellectually, I use the Brit vul

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_archive http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?issn=0002-9890 http://www.ams.org/publications/authors/ctp http://www.ams.org/authors/ctp.pdf -- Marc Robert Greene a ?crit : Actually take my crack back--you can read it for free. You just

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

like it! Robert On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Robert Greene wrote: Sorry--turns out that that link lets you read the whole thing(as opposed to the first page) only if you are a Jstor subscriber. (Eventually the academic world will figure out that all information ought to be public access--but not yet a

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

write to me directly and I shall email them a copy(or you can find the Math Monthly in university libraries). All the best Robert On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Robert Greene wrote: Indeed(to SS's message) And real analytic systems do not exist in the real world. Unless you believe in complet

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

Indeed(to SS's message) And real analytic systems do not exist in the real world. Unless you believe in complete pre-destination in the religious sense, that God planned everything infinitely long ago and arranged that things were then what they would have to be so that their analytic continuatio

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

at 06:33:47PM -0700, Robert Greene wrote: To my mind it makes not much sense to suppose that the first order reconstruction is correct in a neighborhood of the listener but higher order is correct in a larger neighborhood--not literally correct. This seems "metaphysically" impossible

Re: [Sursound] Pitch(OT)

far from 440! (which I suppose was the original point). Piano (equal temp.) pitch is a bit disconcerting but there is so much good music for piano one just learns to live with it. Robert On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, David Pickett wrote: At 20:35 25-04-13, Robert Greene wrote: Not nearer--exactly! 440 A

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

Not nearer--exactly! 440 A is the standard pitch in the Western world, though orchestra often shade this up a bit. Middle C is around 261.6 Hz Robert On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, David Pickett wrote: At 18:28 25-04-13, Sampo Syreeni wrote: At middle C, 440Hz, you're down to under 20 centimetres. At 1

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

not see how it would arise from the four signals of B format) On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Sampo Syreeni wrote: On 2013-04-25, Robert Greene wrote: Namely if a hard transient occurs say 30 degrees left of center, the associated wavefront arrives at the left ear before it arrives at the right ear. E

Re: [Sursound] What does a mic with more than 4 channels give you?

I think one can figure out something here without too much mathematical analysis about what is missing in first order. It is similar to what is missing in Blumlein stereo. Namely if a hard transient occurs say 30 degrees left of center, the associated wavefront arrives at the left ear before it a

Re: [Sursound] Saga of the Subs

Dont pay any attention to this about intensity and the Doppler shift for moving objects, would be my suggestion. It is almost all wrong. ELC is mistaken here. See my public post please. Robert On Mon, 25 Feb 2013, etienne deleflie wrote: ELC: Visual cues may play part in this ability, to

Re: [Sursound] Saga of the Subs

This is wrong about the Doppler effect and perception of distance. It would be correct if the object moving and emitting sound as it moved were coming straight towards you and going through you and then moving away. But a police car with a siren say is not aiming straight at you(or at least you b

Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA

This is absolutely true. My late first wife heard stereo as two separate speakers no matter how well the speakers worked for others. She liked mono a lot better. Surround sound was a n ightmare from her viewpoint-- all those speakers playing from different directions each on heard individually.

Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA

I think no serious person in audio wants anything to do with lossy compression which is a commercial compromise for no real reason(uncompressed audio no longer looks like that big a file). Since probably no one is interested in exotic surround items except people who are serious about audio, I th

Re: [Sursound] Spherical speakers ?

The idea actually existed--dBX made one(I think it was they) for commercial /consumer sale Robert On Sat, 20 Oct 2012, Neil & Marcia Adams wrote: Again with txt only (thank you Martin) The late Dick Campbell designed a dodecahedron loudspeaker. Close? h

Re: [Sursound] Spherical speakers ?

automatically. More than an afternoon but less than a week of construction time I would guess. Have fun! Robert On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Paul Hodges wrote: --On 19 October 2012 07:41 -0700 Robert Greene wrote: there is no real reason to want such a thing. I have an electronic chamber organ; in order

Re: [Sursound] Spherical speakers ?

Such a thing was offered for sale for consumers by DBX(as I recall) a long time ago. I do not think it had much success--not surprisingly since there is no real reason to want such a thing. Robert On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Fabio Kaiser wrote: Google for dodecahedron loudspeakers. There you'll find

Re: [Sursound] Spherical speakers ?

There are true omni directional speakers, made by MBL , quite expensive. These work by having a whole surface that expands and contracts --a sort of lens shaped thing that is pushed in and out by compression of the ends. Hard to arrange--hence expensive. But they do have an essentially spherical

Re: [Sursound] Somting for the Weekend - Commerisal 3D sound

This seems to me somewhat exaggerated(the remarks about stereo and the center image). Sure, the center phantom image generated as a sum of two identical L/R signals sounds a little different. But little is the operative word. The correction for this fairly small (Meridian used to have it up on

Re: [Sursound] [OT] FB etc. (was: Re: Trans-Dimensional Portal)

you visit, not just which ones you like, because each of these buttons calls FB API, and allows FB cookies to track you wherever you go. A nice little video on the subject: http://wimp.com/mindreader/ Ronald On 8 Oct 2012, at 20:24, Robert Greene wrote: This is funny but it is of course wron

Re: [Sursound] Trans-Dimensional Portal

This is funny but it is of course wrong, I like facebook a lot, but I dislike text messages, and so on. Which general types of things one likes may develop early, but the details are not set in stone. This kind of thing is an excuse for all kinds of bad stuff that is supposed to be progress but i

Re: [Sursound] Trans-Dimensional Portal

It is rather alarming how insubstantial it all is-- google ,facebook, apple selling gadgets that are really quite useless and google and facebook making money on ads and no other way(google sells how far up the search list you are but that is ad stuff too in effect) The whole USA and a good deal

Re: [Sursound] Unpublished Gerzon paper

I used to bring this stuff up as a reason why early CD did not sound good--that there were possible nonlinearities that made the missing content above 21 kHz actually missed. Onkyo had a player that put content in above 21k that was only vaguely related to the inut signal! Sounded good too. But ev

Re: [Sursound] any idea's on the background of the stereo equations in the WW1977 article?

I have not had a chance to look at this in detail, but one point seems worth noting in advance: Such a conversion is in the literal sense impossible. Stereo is a system with two "degrees of freedom". Horizontal Ambisonics has three. One can Ambisonics into stereo (losing information in the proces

Re: [Sursound] The Sound of Vision (Mirage-sonics?)

Robert On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Robert Greene wrote: The initial meessage is also in my view something of a misconception of the meaning of "perfect pitch" --which ought to be called absolute pitch, since there is nothing perfect about it(no one has perfect resolution of pitch nor of any

Re: [Sursound] The Sound of Vision (Mirage-sonics?)

The initial meessage is also in my view something of a misconception of the meaning of "perfect pitch" --which ought to be called absolute pitch, since there is nothing perfect about it(no one has perfect resolution of pitch nor of anything else!). Absolute pitch is about MEMORY. Lots of peop

Re: [Sursound] The Sound of Vision (Mirage-sonics?)

Could I point out that in fact one does not know what auditory reality is like for other people whether or not they are hearing impaired? One supposes it is similar. And structurally it is similar--people tend to hear sound in the same locations under given circumstances. But literal sensation is

Re: [Sursound] microphone epiphany ?

Strictly speaking, it is not really true that one cannot hear absolute polarity (phase if you must). This is definitely audible though not in as conspicuous as a way as one might expect a priori. The thing is that polarity reversal is not interpreted as directional information. Rather, it is

Re: [Sursound] Dolby Atmos

I perhaps would have myself, but Kavi is a true purist. What you get is what was there. No slippery slope of the "no one will notice" kind there are all. Just what was recorded. Robert On Fri, 25 May 2012, Andrew Levine wrote: Hi Robert, On 25.04.2012, at 03:44, Robert Gr

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 46, Issue 6

You can find a readable(I hope) introduction to spherical harmonics on my website www.regonaudio.com Robert On Thu, 24 May 2012, Augustine Leudar wrote: Hi, I know what I need to do - I just want to find out why Im doing it. The components were not expensive at all - the mic is already built an

Re: [Sursound] Dolby Atmos

in a musical way, I think. On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Stefan Schreiber wrote: Robert Greene wrote: Re dynamic range of orchestras. For recording one needs more than CD standard 16 bits because one never knows when some instantanteous peak may stick way out and clip nastily if one does not ha

Re: [Sursound] Dolby Atmos

Re dynamic range of orchestras. For recording one needs more than CD standard 16 bits because one never knows when some instantanteous peak may stick way out and clip nastily if one does not have a lot of headroom. Thank goodness for 24 bits! But seriously, no orchestral music really has more th

Re: [Sursound] audio point / audio plenum

I agree. Time confusion in stereo(as generated by spaced omnis) is far from being the same thing as spatially diffuse field sound. This is the real reason stereo sounds wrong as far as I am concerned. No offense to people who like "spatial music" but the music I like happens in front. What does n

Re: [Sursound] audio point / audio plenum

It is interesting how this more or less obvious point- that localizing discrete sources and localizing all the(often multiple( reflections that make up the whole spatial impression would be one supposes related--has escapted the popular press especially of the "High End" ilk. They are all wound

Re: [Sursound] Why Ambisonics Didn't Become A Standard, OT: Spatial Music; Low Cost Speakers

Excellent! Most serious manufacturers seem to feel thatthe way to make an inexpensive speaker is to take the top two thirds of a more expensiveone. But of course it is a kind of convention of High End audio that warmth and so on are really not importnat nor perhaps even desirable Cf my guest ed

Re: [Sursound] Why Ambisonics Didn't Become A Standard, OT: Spatial Music; Low Cost Speakers

Interesting indeed, but not new. I think the Unicorn Fenby Legacy(Music of Delius), the part that was done with the Soundfield mike, is one of the finest of all stereo recordings of an orchestra. For naturalness of sound, it is unbeatable and hard for anything else to equal in my view. Robert On

Re: [Sursound] Spatial music

This is very unlikely to be true, that one can justify getting a new TV to save electricity for the sake of the world. To save on your own bills will also take a very long time. People seldom do the arithmetic on this. When the first gas crisis occurred(in the 1970s) I did some calculation of ho

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Being doctrinaire is really not a substitute for thinking. Of course no reproduced music at home is going to be identical to live experience. No one suggested it was. But one could get closer. And it is just silly to say "go to the performance". The music played , even in major cities, is a ver

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

I think that the idea that surround is not good enough for music , good enough to matter, really does not make sense. This is more or less like restricting the idea of music to what works well enough in stereo to be all right. But that is not all music, and indeed for example it does not include

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

I disagree with this. I suppose for some things like pop vocals that do not have a natural acoustic venue surrounding them, surround is not helpful. But for large scaled acoustic music like orchestral music(which of course some people here would dismiss as a niche market) it really does help gene

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

impression(and still am) that it makes for rather nice playback. Robert On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, J?rn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/13/2012 03:49 AM, Robert Greene wrote: While the mode of expression is even more emphatic than my own, RCFA is to my mind right all up and down the line. Talking about 3rd

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

While the mode of expression is even more emphatic than my own, RCFA is to my mind right all up and down the line. Talking about 3rd order is just castles in the air. As a theoretical mathematician, I spend most of my life building castles in the air. But one ought to know that that is what they

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? New Title and questions...

PS Christiaan Huygens of course --fingers thinking phontetics not Dutch! Robert On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Cara Gleeson wrote: To all, I've emailed a few of you individually and am in the process of writing to others (although I couldn't establish everyones email address' unfortunately due to a fe

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? New Title and questions...

One thing that crosses my mind is this: It is rather important in thinking about this to separate out the theory, the practical implementation , and the consumer aspect, that is the presence in the market place. The theory of Ambisonics in terms of physics is quite old. It is really nineteenth ce

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Right on! Apple clearly wants to take over the world. They won't make it but they are surely giving it a try. (And for a brief interval a while back , they had more money than the US government). Sometimes when you feel paranoid, someone really is out to get you. Robert On Mon, 9 Apr 2012, Stef

Re: [Sursound] Blumlein versus ORTF

Thanks everybody for the links and in particular the calculation of models link. I shall work on that one I know the Lipshitz paper well, but it seems that experts disagree. James Johnston has told me a number of times for example that he thinks getting those time cues from ORTF is really importa

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

I agree. My appeal for material to listen to was not intended as a call to get Apple to take over. The blood curdles. Robert On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Marc Lavall?e wrote: I would fear an "applelization" of ambisonics. Apple could impose its own "ok" format (probably as a CAF "chunk" specification)

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

t embarrassing themselves - and if you don't believe that (the fear of) embarrassment is not a strong driver, just watch an inexperienced western audience at the end of a Gamelan concert trying to get up the courage to actually leave the concert _during_ the ending piece :-) . Actually, talking a

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

d the WaterLily Mahler 5 "a benchmark for all future orchestral recording". Depend on who you ask, I guess. Robert On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Robert Greene wrote: Sorry you don't like it. Apparently you do not like the sound of the St Petersburg orchestra since of course we did absolutely

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

like the balance, complain to Maestro Temirkanov. Not that I suppose he will be very interested... Robert On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, David Pickett wrote: At 12:42 02/04/2012, Robert Greene wrote: Incidentally you do not need to build a concert hall to record at one point. Try the WaterLily/St Peter

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

This is to my mind one of the basic problems of home audio-- the floor reflection, to have it or not. Some speakers do, most do in fact. But some do not, e.g. large line sources or large vertical planar radiators. This means that in effect one has two quite different kinds of sound generated by s

Re: [Sursound] Transient time differences

which may compensate for the spaciousness that is lost in stereo reproduction. I will do some calculations on ORTF stereo so that I can understand it better. - Original Message From: Robert Greene To: Surround Sound discussion group Sent: Mon, April 2, 2012 1:44:28 PM Subject: Re:

Re: [Sursound] Transient time differences

Thanks for the information. But here is my question in more precise form: Suppose you do a recording with ORTF(which of course has its own set of problems). Suppose you record a source that is say 15 degrees left of center. and that the source is a pistol shot(an impulse). Now the impulse will ar

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

Right on! There are still people who like music as it is, apparently. One besides me I mean. This thing about visual cues is hoary with age. It is also marlarkey. People do like to look at musicians, but the sound is what counts and the sound in the audience in a good spot is just fine. It is wha

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

This sounds plausible except that it is clearly completely wrong. Hunger Games has grossed about one quarter billion dollars in a few weeks worldwide. Don't talk about small taking over! Small is there, all right. But large is still there, too. Taylor Swift's Speak Now sold over a million in the

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

rifield is really better? Robert On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Richard Dobson wrote: On 02/04/2012 17:21, Robert Greene wrote: .. It is really not too late at least for Trifield. If it is really better how will people know? It is only a minority who bother to go to demos and shows. , people wou

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Incidentally, I may come across as interested only in classical music(true) but popular music is the same way. Anyone watch the Country Music awards show(you cannot get more grass roots popular than that). See a lot of country music singers doing antiphonal calling from all over the auditorium? O

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Part of the point must surely be to reach the public eventually? Or is that somehow sort of declasse? Robert On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Richard Dobson wrote: On 02/04/2012 16:34, Robert Greene wrote: It may be old but it is still all but universal in acoustic concert music. Maybe; but acoustic

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

I agree completely. The elephant in the room of audio and the reproduction of music is that in fact most people do not seem to WANT music at home that sounds like music in concerts. They say they do, but in practice they have been conditioned-- or perhaps they are just like that--to want somethin

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Josh On Apr 2, 2012, at 8:34 AM, Robert Greene wrote: It may be old but it is still all but universal in acoustic concert music. I think it is disingenuous to say that it is not. How many symphony concerts have you been to recently where the orchestra surrounded the audience. The other way arou

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

Re marketing I am not a marketing expert but it seems to me that if anyone had really wanted Ambisonics to succeed, there would have been 1 presentations at shows for example. I have over the years encountered exactly one, by Meridian. Period. And 2 there would have been low priced or free demo d

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

History, Cambridge 1981, p169). Dave On 01/04/2012 10:20, Paul Hodges wrote: --On 31 March 2012 18:34 -0700 Robert Greene wrote: Of course music exists that is not in front. But the vast bulk of concert music is not like that. Sure; but what proportion of music are we happy to be unable to

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

uffers from some of the same problems. 3) Requires lots less speakers than Wave Field Synthesis. Not so good: 1) I frequently find that I have front/back confusion. Let the debate continue. - Original Message From: Robert Greene To: Surround Sound discussion group Sent: Su

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

Because it is good! It keeps people from making really wrong meaningless recordings by spacing microphones a long way apart! Robert On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Eero Aro wrote: Robert Greene wrote: 2 Forces people to use one point miking Actually I don't understand why you list one point miki

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

l Waterman wrote: I agree totally with Robert here. Most of my work mates have 5.1 set-ups at home, but would never be bothered to have anything that required more thought, so bring on the 5.1 mixes of ambisonic source material and at least let the masses get a listen. Cheers, Neil On 4/1

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

OK I thought that was a good idea, for people to say what they thought was good and not good about Ambisonics. So here I go(first I guess but my mother always said Act in haste, repent at leisure. I think she meant it as cautionary but I have always taken it as advisory!). Good 1 Elegant as math

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

I don't think anyone thinks that! What people do think is that Ambisonics needs some sort of commercial accesibility-- which it could get if discs were put out that provided not abstract Ambisonics as it were but Ambisonics as decoded to the 5.1 set up. The message was that no one (statistically

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

I raised earlier the question of why Trifield is not available to the general public. Given that there are other people(e.g. J. Bongiorno in High End and all kinds of things in home theater) offering devices to synthesize a third channel--and that lots of people already have a center channel spe

Re: [Sursound] Question about directional bands

Actually, I think the ear/brain does not make this distinction without pattern recogntion, in other words, the height impression to the extent that it arises from spectrum of the sound depends on what the ear/brain expects the actual sound to be. There is a similar effect about frontal versus rea

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

I did not say it should(be played in front)! It just is. Of course there are instances when antiphonal effects are used, and very well they can work too. But I think that using this sort of thing as a way to persuade people they ought to have 16 channels of playback or something is wrong heade

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

This is a diversion. Maybe it is part of being interested in surround sound to believe it is really important. Of course music exists that is not in front. But the vast bulk of concert music is not like that. People like to look at what is happening. They always have, and I doubt that this

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

One of the things that is emerging here is(dare I say so) that Ambisonics for music at home is just not such a good idea. Attractive though it is mathematically--and it is very much that-- it is really impractical for home music. Perhaps it is worthwhile to think for a moment about why. My view:

Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?

ert On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:52:22PM -0700, Robert Greene wrote: Surround in music has never been a hit in any form and it still is not. Moreover most music is not really enhanced by it in the minds of most people. Orchestral music benefits enorm

  1   2   >